Legal Opinion
Tabatchnick v. G. D. Searle & Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided April 11, 1975No. 758-70PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SUMMARY
User of oral contraceptives sued manufacturers on claim of injury from use. Husband asserted claim per quod.
At discovery stage, orders were entered requiring reports of expert witnesses to be furnished, and examination of experts on deposition, to ascertain details of ailment claimed, disease process, etiology and pathology, and medical theory relied on. Orders were complied with for one expert witness, not a treating physician.
After trial began, plaintiffs sought to call a new, additional expert to provide foundation for testimony of noticed expert, and defendants objected.…
2Cited by41 opinions
- John H. Smith v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1985
- Dicky D. Voegeli and Sharon Voegeli v. Harvard R. Lewis and Methodist Hospital, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
- KN Energy, Inc. v. Great Western Sugar Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1985
- Shelak v. White Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.